Upload
hamien
View
216
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Intranasal Drug Delivery: Drug Development Considerations Bruce H Morimoto, PhD Executive Director, Applied Translational Medicine May 6, 2015
Rapid, fast onset Nasal epithelium highly vascularized Large absorption area
Non-invasive Painless, no needles or injections Easy administration by patient or caregiver
Amenable to peptides, oligos and biologics Avoid gastric degradation No hepatic first-pass metabolism
Why the Nose?
2
The Nasal Cavity
Respiratory region Epithelial tissue highly
vascularized Site of drug absorption to
systemic circulation
Olfactory epithelium Roof of the nasal cavity,
represents ~10% of total surface area
Direct access to olfactory bulb
3
Nasal Drug Delivery
From McGraw-Hill 4
Nasal Spray Distribution
Optinose: Breath-powered delivery
5
Impel: Pressurized Olfactory Delivery
Drug Development Considerations
Product Characterization
Objectives Reproducibility of content Consistency of delivery
Potential impact on both Safety Efficacy
Nasal drug products Formulation Spray device
7
8
Physical and Chemical Tests
Adapted from: FDA: Guidance for industry: nasal spray and inhalation solution, suspension, and spray drug products
Test Parameter Description
Description Appearance, size, color should be tested and within acceptance criteria.
Identification Two independent chromatographic procedures used to verify the identity of the drug substance in the drug product.
Assay Analytical determination of drug substance and stability determination.
Impurities and Degradation Products
Levels of impurities and degradation products to be determined by a validated analytical procedure. Impurities > 0.1% must be reported and specified.
Preservatives and Stabilizing Excipients Assay
If present, preservative, antioxidants, chelating agents, or other stabilizers should be assayed.
Microbial Limits
Microbial quality should be controlled and show that the product does not support the growth of microorganisms throughout expiration. Tests should include total aerobic, yeast and mold count, and absence of designated organisms.
Net Content Net content of the formulation in each container should be within release specifications.
pH pH should be within acceptance criteria.
Osmolality Osmolality should be tested for products that contain an agent to control tonicity.
Viscosity Viscosity should be tested for products that contain an agent contributing to the viscosity, both upon release and during stability.
Nasal Formulations
Absorption enhancers Surfactants, cyclodextrins, bile salts, tight-junction modifiers
Osmolarity Iso-osmolarity: ~280 mOsm/kg Hypo-osmotic (<50 mOsm/kg): can improve absorption, but also
increase potential for epithelial damage Hyper-osmotic (>900 mOsm/kg): increase in mucus secretions
pH Nasal cavity is slightly acidic, pH 5.5-6.5 pH <3 or >10 has been shown to result in histo damage Irritation can occur outside physiological range
Viscosity Can increase residence time in nasal cavity, but also affect spray
characteristics (droplet size) 9
Nasal Spray Device Tests
Test Parameter Description
Pump Delivery Pump delivery testing should be performed to assess delivery and reproducibility. Typically, the weight of individual sprays should be within 15% or the target weight, and their mean within 10% of the target weight.
Spray Content Uniformity
Individual sprays should be analyzed for drug substance content in multiple sprays, at the beginning and at the end of an individual container, among containers and among different batches.
Spray Pattern and Plume Geometry
Spray pattern testing should be performed on a regular basis, and acceptance criteria should include shape and size of the pattern. Plume geometry is typically established during the characterization of the product and does not need to be tested routinely after.
Droplet Size Distribution
Droplet size distribution should be controlled in terms of ranges for the D10, D50, D90, span and percentage of droplets <10µm.
Particle Size Distribution
Required for suspension nasal sprays only, and should include acceptance criteria for particle size distribution of the drug substance particles in the formulation.
Particulate Matter Levels of particulate matter should be tested with appropriate acceptance criteria.
Weight Loss (Stability) Weight loss should be assessed for samples stored on stability, in two different container orientations.
Leachables (Stability) Analytical methods to identify, monitor and quantify leached components should be established.
Adapted from: FDA: Guidance for industry: nasal spray and inhalation solution, suspension, and spray drug products 10
Additional Drug Product Characterization
Pump priming and sprays per unit How many actuations needed until the spray unit delivers the
desired dose/volume? How many usable sprays per unit?
Re-priming and in-use How long can a spray unit sit before it needs to be primed
again? Will delivery be sufficient when used as per the clinical
protocol? Preservative effectiveness
Will the preservative prevent microbial contamination with use?
11
12
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
1 3 5 7 9 11 13 15 17 19 21 23 25 27 29 31
placebo 1
placebo 2
placebo 3
Aptar VP7 pump 3 mL fill
Priming and Usable Spray
Spray Number
Per
cent
Del
iver
ed
Priming
Usable sprays
13
0.0000
0.0200
0.0400
0.0600
0.0800
0.1000
0.1200
0 2 4 6 8 10 12
gm d
eliv
ered
Spray #
Day 1-AM
0.0000
0.0200
0.0400
0.0600
0.0800
0.1000
0.1200
0 2 4 6 8 10 12
gm d
eliv
ered
Spray #
Day 4-PM
In-use Study
How long can the spray unit sit before it needs to be re-primed? Spray unit primed then left upright on the benchtop for 4 days Unit then actuated and spray weight measured
Conclusion: spray units do not need to be reprimed if unused for up to 4 days
Nonclinical Studies
Local tolerance – often a function of the formulation (enhancers, preservative) Cultured nasal epithelia Assessment of irritation in tox studies
Clinical observations (dryness, secretions, redness) Histopathological evaluation
Changes in olfactory function Zinc gluconate, case example Histopathology in tox studies Smell identification tests in clinical studies
14
Nonclinical Studies
Defining the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) Regulatory agencies want to understand dose and target organ
toxicity Multiples of the intended clinical dose not usually sufficient
Maximum feasible dose (MFD) Justify the high dose tested MFD defined by solubility and volume of administration
Volume of administration dependent on species Trade-off: Increasing volume also increases variability Multiple dosing sessions, alternating nares
15
16
Comparative Anatomy
http://www.aafp.org/afp/2000/0115/p427.html
Species Comparison
Body Weight (kg) Nasal Volume (mL) Nasal Surface Area (cm2)
Man 70 20 160
Monkey 7 8 62
Dog 10 20 221
Rat 0.25 0.4 14
Mouse 0.03 0.03 2.8
Adapted from: Gizurarson S: Animal models for intranasal drug delivery studies. A review article. Acta Pharm Nord 2(2), 105-122 (1990) 17
Nonclinical Intranasal Dose Administration
Points to consider Rodents
Pipettor Dispense small bead Place near nostril Allow normal inspiration for uptake into nasal cavity
Dogs Incredibly important to train animals to accept dosing Exclude animals that do not take to dosing
18
Bridge from Nonclinical to First-in-Human
No Observed Adverse Effect Level (NOAEL) from animal safety studies used to inform a starting clinical dose
Allometric scaling is one method to compare doses between species For example, body surface area (rather than body weight) is used
to scale systemic drugs Scaling for nasal administered drugs is more challenging because
of the large differences in intranasal anatomy. From previous table, the nasal surface area-to-body weight is: Human: 2.3 Dog: 22 Rat: 56
If systemic exposure is the objective for nasal delivery, then allometric scaling by dose-exposure can be justified
19
Case-Study: Intranasal davunetide
Nose-to-brain?
If intranasal administration bypasses systemic circulation… How to assess exposure for safety considerations? Will anatomical differences between species effect transport to the
brain? What is the impact on translation from animal to human?
For davunetide clinical development program, demonstrated: nose systemic circulation brain Rat pharmacokinetic study: continuous CSF collection
CSF exposure proportional to systemic exposure and Independent of route of administration
Quantitative whole-body autoradiography: kinetic study Intranasal and intravenous administration Showed brain exposure no greater after intranasal administration (compared
to IV) for an equivalent dose No increase in olfactory bulb exposure after intranasal administration
21
22
Open-label, single dose, plasma and continuous CSF collection Lumbar (L3-L4) catheterization CSF collected at 0.2 mL/min for 4
hours, 1 mL fractions 6 subjects per group Measured drug levels as well as various
AD biomarkers Healthy Adult (18-45 years)
50 mg intravenous 300 mg intravenous 15 mg intranasal
Human Pharmacokinetics (PK)
Plasma & CSF Profile: 50 mg IV
23
Continuously collect CSF and plasma Healthy subjects (n=6) Measure drug levels with validated LC-MS/MS assay
Compartmental PK Modeling
1
Input(intranasal)
CL/F
/F
Ka
0
12 3
/F1
Input(intranasal)
CL/F
/F
Ka
0
12 3
/F
Input(intranasal)
CL/F
/F
Ka
0
12 3
/F1
24
Peripheral Volume of Distribution (for IV and IN)
2 1 2
c p
dA Q A Q A=dt V V
× ×−
CSF:
( ) [ ]30 to LAG1 LAG1 to LAG2 1 LAG2 to 3
dA = + Kin1 +Kin2 ×A - Kout Adt ∞ ×
Explored various compartmental PK models Best fit: Two-compartment model
Computational model predicts experimental data
Intranasal PK
25
The IV compartmental model fits the intranasal plasma and CSF data Suggests pharmacokinetics in CSF is a function of plasma concentrations Intranasal drug administration results in systemic distribution (not direct nose-to-
brain) Compartmental PK model allowed for:
PK simulation to evaluate dose and dose paradigms for optimization of steady state CSF concentrations
PK model allowed for sparse blood sampling in Phase II/III
1
Input(intranasal)
CL/F
/F
Ka
0
12 3
/F1
Input(intranasal)
CL/F
/F
Ka
0
12 3
/F
Input(intranasal)
CL/F
/F
Ka
0
12 3
/F1
Nose-to-brain
Summary
Advantages Non-invasive Rapid absorption Amenable to peptides and biologics
Disadvantages More complex drug product characterization and stability Challenges with local irritation, potential for unblinding? Nonclinical dose selection and scaling Potentially low bioavailability
26
References
27
Campbell C., Morimoto BH., Nenciu D., Fox AW. (2012) Drug development of intranasally delivered peptides. Therapeutic Delivery 3(4), 557-568
Dhuria SV, Hanson LR, Frey WH, 2nd (2010) Intranasal delivery to the central nervous system: mechanisms and experimental considerations. J Pharm Sci 99(4), 1654-1673
Merkus FW, Van Den Berg MP (2007) Can nasal drug delivery bypass the blood-brain barrier?: questioning the direct transport theory. Drugs R D 8(3), 133-144
Maggio, ET (2006) Intravail: highly effective intranasal delivery of peptide and protein drugs. Expert Opin. Drug Deliv. 3(4), 529-539
Questions? [email protected]
28